Serotta F1 fork vs Steel Fork

[Black Dog]

My winter project is coming along nicely as I look out the window at the 2 feet of snow on the ground and the 8 foot tall snowbanks. Here is the question.

I have just acquired an absolutely pristine 1991 Colorado II from a fellow forumite; my 1st Serotta 20+ years after 1st wanting one! (more on that later in the production frames gallery). The frame came with a threaded F1 fork and the original steel fork. I know that there are many of you that have many miles on both and was wondering about the differences in ride quality between the two forks. I am deciding which fork to mount. I do not care about weight differences only the ride. Any comments about performance and comfort differences between the forks would be greatly appreciated.

http://i900.photobucket.com/albums/ac209/BlackDogryka/Serotta%20CII/file_zps82b1d07c.jpg (http://s900.photobucket.com/user/BlackDogryka/media/Serotta%20CII/file_zps82b1d07c.jpg.html)


I am sure someone will notice the out of place detail of this frame...
http://i900.photobucket.com/albums/ac209/BlackDogryka/Serotta%20CII/file_zps1b3a14d4.jpg (http://s900.photobucket.com/user/BlackDogryka/media/Serotta%20CII/file_zps1b3a14d4.jpg.html)

[cachagua]

Well, you're in the perfect position to experiment! Nice of you to ask us, but try 'em both and we'll ask you.

One of my Zen master's favorite sayings: "Don't ask -- find out."

In all seriousness, I'd like to hear what your impressions are -- I've been swapping forks around a couple of bikes recently, and haven't gotten a clear result. (Mostly because I haven't actually ridden the bikes enough, but that's another issue!)

[Black Dog]

Well, you're in the perfect position to experiment! Nice of you to ask us, but try 'em both and we'll ask you.

One of my Zen master's favorite sayings: "Don't ask -- find out."

In all seriousness, I'd like to hear what your impressions are -- I've been swapping forks around a couple of bikes recently, and haven't gotten a clear result. (Mostly because I haven't actually ridden the bikes enough, but that's another issue!)


True enough. I am sure that I will try both, 6 weeks from now when the snow is gone. I am still trying to get my head around what parts to hang on this bike! Ah, 1st world problems...:help:

[cachagua]

Oh yes, the weather. Forgot about that. Also forgot to say congratulations! That looks gorgeous.

I can't quite see from your photos, is it the vintage with the top tube flattened a little where it joins the hear tube? Mr. Kirk can probably tell us when that feature was being produced.

For parts, I'd go pretty traditional -- nothing electronic, no more gears than fingers. Would you saw a hole in the dash of a '67 Mustang to put in touch-screen navigation? But that's just me.

One thing, a King headset makes the fork-swapping quick and easy. . .

[Ken Robb]

I seem to recall that Ben wrote that the F-1 was the first carbon fork that rode as well as his steel forks which suggests that one shouldn't expect a huge difference. I had a threaded F1 on my CSi and had no complaints except for very limited clearance between the top of the tire and the underside of the fork. A 700x25 Conti tire was very tight and I doubt that a Michelin Pro 1 would have fit at all. If I had your bike I would probably end up riding the steelie and selling the F1 but-------since the F1 is already installed I would want to try it, swap for the steel fork and compare ride/handling. The F1 would have to ride a lot better for me to choose it over the steel fork with its better clearance and the classic look that I prefer.

[dekindy]

The old time guys at my LBS that might have a preference for steel say without hesitation, carbon is better.

[Ahneida Ride]

My Legend had an F1 and now has an F3.

The F1 is a very good fork.

My Bedford has a steel fork. I prefer the steel.

Kelly built many of the Serotta steel forks.

[victoryfactory]

The old time guys at my LBS that might have a preference for steel say without hesitation, carbon is better.

They may be comparing steel to modern carbon forks. The F1 was Serotta's first carbon and was super stiff and way heavy. Without the compliant carbon ride and with little weight difference,
I'd go steel in this case. (if it was made for that frame)
For a real improvement and ~3/4 lb weight savings, go threadless with
a modern carbon fork. I did that on my Atlanta and never looked back.

VF

[Black Dog]

Thanks. It is a true CII with the all three tubes of the main triangle being shaped. It has split cable stops on the top tube which I suspect were put on when it went back to the factory for a repaint in 1997. I am pretty sure that they were not even an option in 1991 when it was built.

As for the parts I am starting to put on some 8 Speed Dura-Ace 7400 (with down tube shifters). I also have a 1st generation 8 Speed Record Ergo's (1991-ish) with same FD and RD. My Last option is to hang a last generation Chorus 10 Speed Groupo. I will be keeping my 11 speed chorus on my Ti bike.

As for wheels, I have a set of H PLus Son Tb 14's on the way that I will lace onto some Dura Ace 7700 hubs.

I will be putting a lot of miles on this bike regardless.


Oh yes, the weather. Forgot about that. Also forgot to say congratulations! That looks gorgeous.

I can't quite see from your photos, is it the vintage with the top tube flattened a little where it joins the hear tube? Mr. Kirk can probably tell us when that feature was being produced.

For parts, I'd go pretty traditional -- nothing electronic, no more gears than fingers. Would you saw a hole in the dash of a '67 Mustang to put in touch-screen navigation? But that's just me.

One thing, a King headset makes the fork-swapping quick and easy. . .

[Black Dog]

Speaking of weather. This is what passes for a ride around my place these days.

http://i900.photobucket.com/albums/ac209/BlackDogryka/file_zpsd73edd26.jpg (http://s900.photobucket.com/user/BlackDogryka/media/file_zpsd73edd26.jpg.html)

http://i900.photobucket.com/albums/ac209/BlackDogryka/file_zpse6e6e8ad.jpg (http://s900.photobucket.com/user/BlackDogryka/media/file_zpse6e6e8ad.jpg.html)

[LJohnny]

The old time guys at my LBS that might have a preference for steel say without hesitation, carbon is better.

Ha! On the other hand I brought my CSi to the LBS one day and while shooting the breeze., the tolic came up and everyone at the shop was on the steel fork side. In fact they were at the time replacing a carbon fork on another CSi and the owner did it because the owner of the bike wanted that done, against their advise. I am not sure wheather it was an F1 or 3.... It is a matter of opinion. Albeit I will keep mine with the steel fork :thumbup:

Sent from my SGH-T679 using Tapatalk 2

[David Kirk]

I have a bit of experience with both these forks and will share my 2 cents.

I'll cut to the chase - they both ride very well. The F1 was made originally to ride as well as, and be as durable as, a steel fork..........and I have to say that at the time it came out VERY few carbon forks could make that claim and some were downright scary.

I think you'll find that they will feel more similar than different. You might find that the carbon fork feels a bit more damp (no typical of a carbon fork but due to the full structural foam core) and quieter and that the steel fork might ride just a shade more smoothly. Frankly it will come down to personal preference and what floats your boat. I doubt anyone would say one was head and shoulders above the other.

Have fun trying both and seeing what you like.

Dave

[Black Dog]

Thanks David. That is exactly what I needed to know. I have been trying to come up with reasons to run the F1 over the original steel fork and unless there was a significant performance gain with the F1 my heart and head are telling me to run the steel fork. I prefer to run 25c tires on 23mm rims and this seems to be impossible on the F1.

Thanks to everyone who has chimed in. This place is truly a special place on the interwebs. Any other opinions are certainly welcome. :)

I have a bit of experience with both these forks and will share my 2 cents.

I'll cut to the chase - they both ride very well. The F1 was made originally to ride as well as, and be as durable as, a steel fork..........and I have to say that at the time it came out VERY few carbon forks could make that claim and some were downright scary.

I think you'll find that they will feel more similar than different. You might find that the carbon fork feels a bit more damp (no typical of a carbon fork but due to the full structural foam core) and quieter and that the steel fork might ride just a shade more smoothly. Frankly it will come down to personal preference and what floats your boat. I doubt anyone would say one was head and shoulders above the other.

Have fun trying both and seeing what you like.

Dave

[cachagua]

8 Speed Dura-Ace 7400...

I nearly said 7400! I actually typed that first, and then backed off to post something a little less specific. 7400 on my Colorado too.

A set of H PLus Son Tb 14's on the way that I will lace onto some Dura Ace 7700 hubs...

You are gonna LOVE those wheels. The rims will look perfect on that bike, they're really friendly to build, and they ride SO nicely -- lively and smooth.

[bluesea]

Thanks David. That is exactly what I needed to know. I have been trying to come up with reasons to run the F1 over the original steel fork and unless there was a significant performance gain with the F1 my heart and head are telling me to run the steel fork. I prefer to run 25c tires on 23mm rims and this seems to be impossible on the F1.

Thanks to everyone who has chimed in. This place is truly a special place on the interwebs. Any other opinions are certainly welcome. :)


Yup, I've had about 2mm vertical clearance with 25mm 4000S on Neutron rims under an F1. The thought of debris rubbing the undersides of that beautiful carbon fork was too much for my sensibilities.

[velotrack]

A little OT, but pretty nice paint on that thing.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by dekindy View Post
The old time guys at my LBS that might have a preference for steel say without hesitation, carbon is better.


They may be comparing steel to modern carbon forks. The F1 was Serotta's first carbon and was super stiff and way heavy. Without the compliant carbon ride and with little weight difference,
I'd go steel in this case. (if it was made for that frame)
For a real improvement and ~3/4 lb weight savings, go threadless with
a modern carbon fork. I did that on my Atlanta and never looked back.

VF

This 'old time guy' says steel still rides better than any carbon. The only thing you gain with a carbon fork is less weight, in some cases a LOT of less weight but for all around ride, steel, IMHO, is a better ride.

Looks better too, on a steel frame.

[Seramount]

have never ridden a Serotta steel fork, but my F1 seems bulletproof and works nicely with a ti frame.

just wish it weighed a few hundred grams less.

[rwsaunders]

Max Conti's that I could fit on an F1 were 25mm 4Seasons on Open Pro rims and 25mm Competitions on Nemesis rims. Great riding fork btw.